The Cambridge History of India, Vol. III: Turks and Afghans v3.c30.s1.58.2

v3.c30.s1.58.2

In this case the builders left the enclosure wall and gateways of the desecrated temple much as they had found them, but of the temple itself they kept only the plinth, and on it erected an entirely new superstructure of brick and plaster, embellished here and there with glazed bricks. In style this tomb is typically Saracenic, if not purely Persian; nor is there anything in its design (nor indeed, in the design of any other brick or stone building of this period) to indicate that the old stone architecture of the Hindus exerted any appreciable influence upon it, beyond contributing some of the materials for their building. Far different is it with the wooden architecture of this epoch. Unfortunately, owing to their perishable nature, none of the old Hindu structures of wood have survived to the present day: but there can be no question that from time immemorial, wood had been, and under the Muhammadans still continued to be, the chief building material of the Kashmīrīs. Even in the reign of Akbar stone-masons had to be imported into Kashmīr to build the fort of Harī Parbat;